Reply With Quote
Which blue states will Obama lose? I'm guessing worst-case scenario, only Pennsylvania and New Hampshire.
It's not bad...but it's not enough to win, especially since Obama wasn't the first choice among the BIG BLUE STATES...he wasn't the first choice in any of them.
Famous last wordsSpin high youth turnout being bad for Obama.
1 2 3 go!
You know there are the exact same PCT of first time voters in this election as Kerry got in 2004?
Which blue states will Obama lose? I'm guessing worst-case scenario, only Pennsylvania and New Hampshire.
If high minority turnout was all it took Jesse Jackson would have gotten the nomination back in 84.
Answer me this. If we see an increase in turnout this year what demographics will make a disproportional percentage of the new voters?
Avatar bet? Sig bet? le bet? Name it.
Oh and its pretty funny NOW you want to use a percentage to determine a turnout.
Um...take a look at your sig dip .
Goddamn I'm happy you showed up...after getting owned on that chart I felt like the stupidest poster in this thread and now I no longer do...thanks for being here
If Jesse Jackson was carrying hispanics the way Obama is then you might have a point.
But even MORE important if minorities made up the same percentages of the population that they do today then you might have a point as well.
So New York is going blue? You're still going with that? I would've thought by now you'd back off that claim.
The irony of calling anybody stupid when they think New York is going blue.Goddamn I'm happy you showed up...after getting owned on that chart I felt like the stupidest poster in this thread and now I no longer do...thanks for being here
smh
Man If he loses Penn I am never EVER looking at another poll again.
The worst part of McCain winning this election in a squeaker?
whottt claiming he's vindicated when he predicted a McCain landslide.
I just don't understand how every single poster could be wrong. People bring up Dewey and Truman, but polling methods were less sophisticated and they actually stopped a lot of polling because it was such a foregone conclusion Dewey would win. It's not like Truman made some last-minute surge, his momentum had been building for two months.
Carter led Reagan in a single poll before their final debate, but there was a massive wave to Reagan after it.
Yeah no. The worst part of McCain winning is McCain winning.
Well, aside from that. I'm sorry, McCain might win, I am not at all calling this for Obama despite that stupid "It's over!" thread I posted. I am willing to concede this might be a tighter race than the polls are showing, but anybody who thinks New York is going to be a part of his coalition is an idiot.
Thats why I don't understand the reasoning of him spending so much time in PA. There has to be something there that they see whereas he has pretty much forgotten about, VA,FL, and OH.... Well not forgotten but you know what I mean.
Yeah. If Penn were a lost cause, it would make more sense to defend Virginia, Colorado, Florida and Ohio and forego offense. I'm guessing McCain thinks Iowa, New Mexico and Colorado are lost causes. That alone + the Kerry States gets Obama to 273. Therefore, he doesn't have to go out and stump in the West, there's bleeding over into other media markets in Ohio if he's stumping in Western Penn, it's closer to stumping in Florida and Virginia. That's the only explanation that makes sense to me - he's conceding Colorado and New Mexico and he needs a big blue state to flip. Pennsylvania and its 21 EVs are the best target.
Whats easier? Praying for one miracle in PA or praying for miracles across many states? Now that he's conceded CO he HAS to turn PA in order to have any shot of winning.
He's in PA because it provides him with his only shot for electoral victory. He can't go anywhere else because if he doesn't get PA its over. Its not a decision they made, its a decision the electoral map and Obama's dominance made for them.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories...052_Page2.html
What do you make of this, Manny? Wishful thinking?
bad link - what story is it? If its on politico chances are I read it earlier? Is it the McCain pollster's opinion?
Yeah, his contention that "Wal Mart women" will carry McCain to victory
He's predicting a huge turnout made of demographics other than those which are likely to support Obama. I don't know how much to take his story seriously, but I think it is conventional wisdom that an increase in turnout is going to come largely from the groups that usually have lower turnout such as minorities and the youth. White women are a block that tends to vote a decent clip and nothing has shown us that they're breaking overwhelmingly for McCain. I know he looks at it with a finer toothed comb but I don't see how thats a demographic thats going to come out in droves for McCain and outweigh the already impressive turnout numnbers of the other demographics I mentioned as pro Obama.
I'm sure that some bloggers like Nate Silver or the guy at EV.com will take a good look at it and dismantle the opinion in a much better way. I'll just say that everything I've seen on turnout so far does not seem to support what he said.
whottt, give it a rest ... your ass has been kicked enough already today. Rest that re brain of yours for the night and come back for more tomorrow.
http://www.rove.com/polling_notes/00...s_10_25_08.pdf
Polling News & Notes
Overlooked Recent Polling And Insights • October 25, 2008
Gallup: No Increase In Proportion Of First-Time Voters. Despite media attention on the possibility of a flood
of new voters, a Gallup analysis this week found the number of voters who say they will be voting for the first
time this year - 13% - is identical to the number who said in 2004 they would be voting for the first time. Of
course, high turnout in 2004 (when 16% more voters came to the polls than in 2000) diminished the pool of
possible first-time voters for 2008. So increases in turnout in 2008 may come more from those who have
voted at some point in the past than those who are entirely new to the process.
2008 2004
Voting For First Time 13% 13%
Voted Previously 83% 85%
Do Not Plan To Vote 4% 2%
Actually...that's not my contention or at least not my only one...keep in mind I'm predicting Obama will wind up with fewer votes than Kerry got in 2004.
You guys keep thinking there's not going to be a price paid for not putting Hillary on the ballot...
I think that's incredibly stupid and shortsighed on ya'lls part....that works under the assumption that all candidates are equal and Americans vote for party over candidate yet there is a mountain of evidence to refute that.
All candidates are not equal...all candidates do not inspire the same people the same way.
If Pat Buchannan had the nomination in 2000 and 2004 he wouldn't have won. If you guys had given the 2004 nomination to anyone but Kerry or Dean you would have won.
But the main reason for my contention? McCain and Palin are much more likeable than W and Cheney were...believe me, it was hard to vote for them....took work for the Democrats to get me to do that....it was a vote cast on pure patriotism, and literally nothing else....
And I don't think you guys are going to pull as many traditional Democratic votes as you think you're goong to...reason being? You didn't put the popular candidate in all the major blue states on the ticket.
What is it that you want to bet then? And just for the record, we're not talking about first time voters, we're talking about the Youth Vote.
We weren't talking about you.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions